





IN BEHALF OF THE FOLLOWING, 

A SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT 

TO THE 

CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES: 

ARTICLE XVI. 

Sec. 1. Tlie riglit of suffrage iu the United States shall he based on 
citizenship,, and the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall 
not he denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account 
of sex, or for any reason not eipially apidicable to all citizens of the 
United States. 

Sec. 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appro¬ 
priate legislation. 

BEFORE THE 

COMNIITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 

OF THE 

UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 

January 24, 1880. 


EMMA MONT. McRAE, JESSIE T. WAITE, 

CATHARINE A. T. STEBBINS, ELIZABETH L. SAXON, 

LILLIE DEVEREAUX BLAKE, MATILDA JOSLYN GAGE, 
PHCEBE W. COUZINS, And SUSAN B. ANTHONY, O 

Delegates of the National Woman Suffrage Association. 






















o Tj E isr T s 


IX BEHALF OF THE FOLLOWING, 

A SIXTEENTH AMENDMENT 


TO THE 

CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES: 

ARTICLE XVI. 

Sec. 1. The right of suffrage iu the United States shall he based on 
citizenship, and the right of citizens of the United States to vote shall 
not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account 
of sex, or for any reason not equally applicable to all citizens of the 
United States. 

Sec. 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appro¬ 
priate legislation. 

BEFORE THE 

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY 


OF THE 


UNITED STATES HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, 



Janviary 24 =, 1880. 




7 or coC 


U. S. A. 




EMMA MONT. McRAE, JESSIE T. WAITE 

CATHARINE A. T. STEBBIN^, ELIZABETH L. SAXON, 

LILLIE DEVEREAUX BLiUtE, MATILDA JOSLYN GAGE, 
PHCEBE W. COUZINS, y And SUSAN B. ANTHONY, 

Delegates of the National Woman Suffrage A ssoeiation. 

























4Gth Congress, ) HOUSE OF KEPKESENTATIVES. ( Mis. Don. 
2d Session, ( ( No. 20. 


WOMAl!^^ SUFFRAGE.—AKGUMENTS BRFORE THE CO MMIT¬ 
TEE ON THE JUDICIARY. 


FEiiUUARY 3, 1880.—Recommitted to the Committee on the Judiciary, and ordered to 

be printed. 


Washington, D. C., January 24, 1880. 

The Chairman pro tem. (Mr. Harris, of Virginia): The order of busi¬ 
ness for the present session of the eom:nittee is the delivery of argu¬ 
ments by delegates to the Woman Suffrage Convention now holding its 
sessions in Washington. I am informed tliat the delegates are in at¬ 
tendance upon the coratnittee. We will be pleased to hear them. 

A list of tlie names of the ladies proposing to speak, with a memoran¬ 
dum of the limit of time allotted to each, has been handed to me for my 
guidance; and, in the absence of the chairman, (Mr. Knott), it will be 
my duty to confine the speakers to the number of minutes api)ortioned 
to them respectively upon the paper before me. As an additional con¬ 
sideration for adhering to the regulation as to time, I will mention that 
members of the committee have informed me that, having made engage¬ 
ments to be at the departments and elsewhere on business appointments 
during the day, they will be compelled to leave the committee-room upon 
the expiration of the time assigned for the present order of business. 

The first name upon the list is that of Mrs. Emma Mont. McRae, of 
Indiana, to whom five minutes are allowed. 

REMARKS OF MRS. EMMA MONT. MCRAE, OF INDIANA. 

Mrs. McRae (who was introduced by Miss Susan B. Anthony, as the 
principal of the high school at Muncie,'Ind.) occupied five minutes. 
She said: 

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the Judiciary Committee: The women 
in the State of Indiana who want to vote doubtless number many more 
than you imagine upon hearing the name of the Hoosier State. In 
Indiana the cause of woman has made marked advancement, and there 
women have advantages over their sex in other States. At the same 
time we realize—and as mothers especially we realize it—that we need 
the right to vote, in order that we may have protection. We need that 
right as one indispensably necessary to our security in the enjoyment 
of other rights. We need the ballot because through the medium of its 
power alone we can hope to wield that influence, in the making of laws 
affecting our own and our children’s ihterests, to which we claim to be 
entitled. Therefore, I have come from the State of Indiana to give ut¬ 
terance to the voice of the mothers among the women of that State, in 
behalf of their petition for the right to vote. 

Some recent occurrences in Indiana, one in particular in the section 
of the State from which I come, have impressed us more sensibly than 
we w^ere ever before impressed with the necessity to us of the exercise 
of this right.* We want to vote that we may be permitted to earn our 
bread.* The particular incident to which I refer was this: In the town 






2 


WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


of Muiicie, Iiicliana, from wliicb I coQie, a youii^ girl, of some twenty- 
one years, who for the past five years had been employed as a clerk in 
the post-office, and upon whom a widowed mother was dej)endent for 
support, was told, on the first of January, that she was no lon^^er needed 
in the office. She had filled her place well; no complaint had been 
made against her, and it was not intimated that her place was a su})er- 
numerary one. She very modestly asked the postmaster as to the 
cause of her discharge, and he replied : ‘^VVe have a man vvho has done 
woik for the party, and we must give that man a place ; I haven't rootn 
for both of you. I must take your place away from you and give it to 
that man.” Kow, there you have at once the reason why we want the 
ballot; we want to be able to do something for the ))art 3 ^ in a substan¬ 
tial way, so that men may not have this to tell ns, that they have no 
room for us,because we do nothing “/hr thepartyp I want this young 
girl, and all the young girls, and all the mothers in Indiana, to be able 
to do something for “ the party” in Indiana, by means of which they can 
show they have the power to protect themselves in earning livelihoods. 
AVhen they have the ballot, women will work for “ the party,” as a 
means of enabling them to hold places in which they may get bread for 
their mothers and for their children, if necessity requires this of them. 

[Here the five minutes expired.] 

REMARKS OF MISS JESSIE T. WAITE, OF ILLINOIS. 

Miss Waite was awarded the next five minutes. She said . 

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the Judiciary Committee of the House of 
Representatives : I feel called upon to say that, previous to this time, the 
women of Illinois have not been ready for the ballot, but that now they 
are. In that State we have attained to almost every right except that of 
the ballot. We have been admitted to all the schools and colleges; we 
have become accustomed to parliamentary usages; we have become accus¬ 
tomed to voting in literary societies and in all matters connected with 
the interests of the colleges and schools; we are considered members in 
good standing of the associations, and, in some cases, the young ladies in 
the institutes have been told that they hold the balance of power. 

The same reason for woman sufirage that has been given by the dele¬ 
gate from Indiana (Mrs. McRae) holds good with reference to the State 
of Illinois, that women must have the ballot in order that they may 
have the means of self support and protection in getting bread for 
themselves and their families by giving to the party that looks for their 
support some substantial evidence of their strength. There are evidences 
of an uprising among the women of our State, and of the development 
among them of this feeling that they must have the ballot. Experi¬ 
ence has demonstrated, especially in the temperance movement, how 
fruitless are all their efforts w hile the ballot is withheld from their 
hands. They have prayed; they have petitioned; they have talked; 
they have lectured; they have done all that they could do, except to 
vote; and yet all availeth them nothing. Miss Frances Willard and 
other ladies presented to the legislature of Illinois a petition of such 
length that it would have reached around this room. It contained over 
50,000 signatures. 

Miss Susan B. Anthony (aside). One hundred and eighty thousand. 

Miss Waite (continuing.) I am obliged for the correction. One him 
dred and eighty thousand. I was not aware that it contained sp many 
names, though I did leariuthat the number of signatures'was largely 
increased over 50,000. The purpose of the petition w^as to have the 


WOMAN SUFFKA<}E. 3 

legislature give the women of the State the right to vote upon the 
question of license or uo license, in their respective districts. 

I have found, since coining to the East, that the women of the West 
have reason to congratulate themselves upon their comparatively ad¬ 
vanced ])osition. They may, indeed, flatter tliemselves upon the truth 
of the remark of Bishop Berkeley, of California, as apjilied to the con¬ 
dition of women in the State of Illinois, when he said that “ Westward 
the star of empire takes its way.” This is manifest in all our schools, 
and in all the avenues of employment which have been opened to women 
in that State, within the past five or ten years. There remains, there¬ 
fore, only this one great dei)rivation, the denial of the suffrage; as, ex¬ 
cept upon scliool district matters (in Avhich particular the right has 
also been exteraled to women in some of the Eastern States), we have 
not been allowed to vote. In some of the counties of our State we 
have ladies as superintendents of scliools, and one or two who are pro¬ 
fessors in colleges. One of the professors in the Industrial TJnivefsity 
at Chamiiaign is a lady. Throughout the State you may find ladies 
who excel in every branch of study and in every trade. It was a lady 
who took the prize at “the Exposition” for the most beautiful piece of ‘ 
cabinet-work. This is said to have been a marvel of beauty, and ex¬ 
traordinary as a specimen of fine art. She was a foreigner; a Scandi¬ 
navian, I believe. Another lady is a teacher of wood-carving, a branch 
of industry which is becoming quite an art. There are lady physicians. 
There are two lady attorneys. Perry and Martin, now practicing in the 
city of Chicago. Bepresentatives of our sex are also to be found among 
real estate agents and journalists; while, in one or two instances, as 
jjreachers, they have been recognized and authorized to say what they 
lelt called upon to say in the churches. 

[Here the five minutes expired.] 

REMARKS OF MRS. CATHERINE A. STEBBINS, OF MICHIOAN. 

Mrs. Stebbins was given the next five minutes. She said: 

“ Better fifty years of Euro|)e than a cycle of Cathay !” So said the 
poet; and I say. Better a week with these inspired women in conference 
than years of an indifferent conventional society ! Their presence has 
been a blessing to the people of this District, and will prove in the 
future a blessing to our government. These women, from all sections 
of our country, with a moral and spiritual enthusiasm (enthusiasm, God 
in us) which seeks to lift off the moral burdens of our government and 
social life, come to you, telling of the obstacles and barriers that have 
beset their path and baffled them in their strivings. They have tried 
to heal the hurts of the stricken in vice, ignorance, and despair; to 
save our land from self-destruction and disintegration. One has sought 
to reform the drunkard, to save the moderate drinker, to convert the 
liquor-seller; another, to shelter the homeless; another, to lift and save 
the abandoned woman. “Abandoned F once asked a prophet-like man 
of our time, who added, “ There never was an abandoned woman with¬ 
out an abandoned man Abandoned of whom ? let us ask. Surely not 
by the merciful Father. No; neither man nor woman is ever aban¬ 
doned by Him, and He sends His instruments, in the persons of some of 
these great-hearted women, to appeal to you to restore their God-given 
freedom of action, that “ the least of these ” may be remembered. 

But in our councils no one has dwelt upon oiieof the great evils of our 
civilization, the scourge of war; though it has been said that women 


4 


WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


will figbt. It is true, there are instances in which the^’ have considered 
it a duty ; there were such in the rebellion. But the majority of women 
would not declare war, would not enlist soldiers, and would not vote 
supplies and equijnnents, because many of the most thoughtful believe 
there is a better way, and that women can bring a moral power to bear 
that shall make war needless. 

Jeannette, in the old song, appeals to her lover, Jennot: 

“If kings will show their might, 

Why, let those who make the quarrels 
Be the only men to light.” 

Like my father and mother, I wms reared in the society of “ Fi iends,’^ 
and we loved the principles of peace, of non resistance of injuries. 
The rebellion came; a brother in New York City enlisted in the Army 
in April, ^61. We had come to think, because we hoped, that men in 
our country had outgrown the spirit of war on the battle-held, although 
we perceived that if men would not repent and make clean our govern¬ 
ment, it might prove inevitable. Brother wrote us that he had enlisted 
^nd must go. We were overwhelmed with grief at the thought, but the 
act was done; we could only submit. I well remember what I wrote 
him'; painful as it was, I must once write it. The thought, 1 told him, 
that he was to deliberately stand in the ranks to be aimed at and shot 
down was a terrible one and a great fear to us; but the other thought, 
that he was as deliberate!}" to stand up and aim his weapon at another 
man, and perhaps take his life, was a far more terrible thought; and let 
me say here, that if men could see and know the lives they take, they 
would shrink, in many cases utterly shrink, from war. They do not see 
the individual men. Modern warfare is very difierent from the old. Men 
seldom fight hand to hand, and the smoke of battle hides their deeds 
from sight. The soldiers tell us—whole regiments, 1 think—that they 
never saw a man fall who was hit by their individual bullets. O, what 
a solace to their sensitive hearts!—not to their consciences, for they start 
out to serve their country. The human heart of man, under the best 
conditions and under the tender guidance of a conscientious mother, 
revolts at such deeds. 

In passing, let me speak of a reply this brother made to our blessed 
mother after she had warned him against the temptations of the great 
city. He wrote, “Never fear for me, dear mother, in regard to these 
temptations; I have not the least inclination to the vices of the'low, 
for I have had too good a start at home.’’ O, comforting, enduring 
words! They live in memory of a mother’s faithfulness and a son’s 
truth. And here we see the close connection with deeper questions of 
the mother’s influence, which we have no time to discuss to-day. 

But let us take one [)icture, representative of the generarfeatures 
of war—we say nothing of our convictions in regard to the contiict. 
Ulysses S. Grant or Anna Ella Carroll make plans and maps for the 
campaign ; McClellan and Meade are commanded to collect the colum- 
biads, muskets and ammunition, and move their men to the attack. 
At the same time the saintly Clara Barton collects her cordials, medi¬ 
cines, and delicacies, her lint and bandages and, putting them in the 
ambulance assigned, joins the same moving train. McClellan’s men 
meet the enemy and men—brothers—on both sides, fall by the death¬ 
dealing missiles. Miss Barton and her aids bear off the sufferers, 
staunch their bleeding wounds, soothe the reeling brain, bandage the 
crippled limbs, pour in the oil and wine, and make as easy as may be 
the soldier’s bed. What a solemn and heart-rending farce is here en¬ 
acted ! And yet in our present develo[>mout, men and women seek to 


WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 5 

reconcile it with the requirements of relij^ion and the necessities of our 
confiictino’ lives. 8o few recoj>nize the absolute truth ! 

But mothers know the cost of a life. One of the sweetest and most 
self-sacribeing women who ever did works of mercy in this District and 
one of the most serious whoever appeared before your committee, iu 
conversation with me about the faith, love, and suffering of women, said, 
^^Iii matiH’nity every mother goes down into the garden of Gethsetnane 
and leans her heart on the heart of God.” Another has said, ‘Gilvery 
mother is a Madonna by the cradle of her first born.” Will you help us 
to save our first born ? 

[Here the time expired.] 

REMARKS OF MRS. ELIZABETH L. SAXON, OF LOUISIANA. 

Mrs. Saxon (to whom was allotted five minutes) said : 

Gentlemen of the Committee: I feel that I would much prefer leaving 
my time- to Miss Anthony bat having been called upon as one of three 
members here pr*:*sent from the south—coming, as I do, from the State 
of Louisiana—it may be incumbent upon me to state why I am here. 

It is said that the emancipation proclamation was a military neces¬ 
sity ; that the political privilege to the negro was a political necessity. 
I entered uj)on the enframdiisemeut of women as a moral necessity. 
We who are mothers hav^e gathered here from all quarters of the land, 
because we want to be able to help our children—helping, through our 
chiidren, all mankind. 

Ill the course of conversation with one or two of the gentlemen here, 

I made to them the statement that our people are not as unfavorable to 
this movement as they think, and I will, as briefly as possible, give the 
authoiity for any statement. In duly last, during the session of the con¬ 
stitutional convention of Louisiana, I presented to that body a petition 
on this subject signed by the very best men in the city of Xew Orleans 
and elsewhere. We had the names of five clergymen and sev^eu of the 
most promiuemt ])hysi(;ians of the State. Dr. Richardson, a leading 
physician, said to his wife afterwards, ‘G rejiroach you for not standing 
by these ladies in their effort for th(‘ emancipation of women.” Gov¬ 
ernor Wiltz, who occupied the c-hair of the convention (being at that 
tinie liiMitimant governor), heartily approved our jietition. We alsopre- 
sentt'd a supplementary [letition, wliich, with the first, was refe-rred to 
the judiciary committee. We were formally invited by Mr. Poche, a 
])romi!ient Creole from one of tlie ujiper jiarishes and a member of the 
commiifee on the elective francliise, to appear before the judiciary 
committee, which was theu meeting in the St. Charles Hotel. They 
set apart an evening for our a(;commodation and permitted the at¬ 
tendance of ;iny other ladies who desired to attend. The ladies, not 
being accustomed to ajipear before public bodies, being timid and 
reserved, as all Soutliern ladies are, declined to take part with me 
in the ))iesentatiou of the subject. However, I went before the judici¬ 
ary cotnmittee attended by Col. John D. Sandige, and made my argu¬ 
ment beiore them. That committee, having upon it some Republican 
memluMs but composed largely of Democrats, heard me so favorably 
thau they reported affirmatively an ordinance on the subject to the con¬ 
vention. Subsequently, I appeared before the convention in company 
with other ladies, among whom were Mrs. Merrick, the wife of the chief 
justice of the Stute; and Mrs. Dr. Keating (niece of Mrs. Dr. Clemence 
^Lozier, of New York,) a lady who had some of the first families of the 
State under her care as a physician, and who, though her pecuniary iu. 


6 


WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


terests were in a way to be saeriticed, was gov^erned solely by her sense 
of right, and did not hesitate to go with me before the convention and 
make her plea for woman—which 1 do not rhink many men would have 
done. Mrs. Dorsey, who left to Jefferson Davis her fortune, and who 
was then on her death-bed—than whom no woman ever ranked higher 
socially, intellectually, or in any way—was among the signers to the 
petition which we presented. She wtote a letter on this subject, which 
was read to the convention by Colonel Sandige, and the occasion of that 
formal letter was the last upon which she ever handled a pen. In our 
appeal to that convention we plead as mothers, and our plea was, “We 
do not want men’s places; we only want you, gentlemen, to help us in 
school reforms, in prison reforms, and social reforms.” 

I would mention, in this connection, the very pertinent retort made 
by the delegate now here from Delaware, from whom I learned of it last 
evening. Ui)on being told by a gentleman prominent in public life that 
he favored woman suffrage, but that men were opposed to women going 
to the polls, she replied, that when there was a foul place about a house, 
a cess-pool, or anything of the kind, it was the women who went to work 
to carbolize and scour it up and, as they did this in private life, they 
would i)rovc equally efficient in scouring up the foul places in public life. 

Yesterday, before the Senate Judiciary Committee, 1 heard Miss An¬ 
thony make an argument that, to my mind, was indisputable. I have 
no doubt that every one who heard it will agree with me in that. Those 
who now come before you, gentlemen, are pleading with you to hel[) us 
women to do that which is emphatically our own work. They want 
nothing more. The character of the ladies who worked with me in this 
cause in Louisiana wms a sufficient guarantee to those who appended 
their names to our petition that it was not the riff raff of society who 
were asking for recognition but the mothers of a community; and let 
me tell you, gentlemen, that whenever the moral forces of a nation are 
to be aroused, as those of our nation are fast becoming aroused, the 
most effective agents that can be en^ployed in the work are the mothers.. 
We want to go into the institutions of learning, and make reforms there. 
We want to go into prisons, and make prison reforms. Wherever woman 
sins and suffers, there let woman go. The ranks of iniquity, gentlemen, 
are not recruited from a foreign race, but from the babes born of our 
bodies and nursed in our arms, and evei\y woman who has gone down 
to ruin has gone down with a broken-hearted mother behind her. I 
plead for those, gentlemen- 

[Here the live minutes expired.] 

REMARKS OF MRS. LILLIE DEVEREUX BLAKE, OF NEW YORK. 

Mrs. Blake (to whom ten minutes had been assigned) came forward^ 
bearing a volume of the Bevised Statutes, and said : 

Mr. Chairman and gentlemen of the committee: 1 come.here with your 
own laws in my hands, and the volume is quite a heavy one too, to ask 
you something about our position to day. 1 ask you whether we, womeUy 
are citizens of this nation 

The Chairman (Mr. Harris, of Virginia, in the chair). I have only to 
say to you, madam, in reply, that the committee are here to listen, not 
to advise. 

Mrs. Blake. Then I will proceed to instruct you, if I may be per¬ 
mitted to instruct so august a body as this. 

I have here the book of laws wliich you, men, have made. I tind in 
this book, under the heading of the chapter on “Citizenship,” the fol¬ 
lowing : 



WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


7 


“Sec. 1992. All persons born in tbe United States and iiot subject to 
any foreij^n power, excluding Indians not taxed, are declared to be citi¬ 
zens of tbe United States.” 

I sui)pose that you, gentlemen, will admit that we, women, are, in 
the language of the section, “persons,” and that we cannot reasonably 
be included in the class spoken of as “Indians not taxed.” Therefore 
I claim that we are “citizens.” 

The same chapter also contains the following : 

“Sec. 1994. Any woman wiio is now or may hereafter be married to 
a citizen of the United States and who might herself be lawfully natur¬ 
alized shall be deemed a citizen.” 

Under this section also w’e are citizens. I am myself, as indeed are 
most of the ladies present, married to a citizen of the United States; 
so that we are citizens under this count if w^e ^'ere not citizens before. 

Then, further, in the legislation kuowm as “The Civil Uights Bill,” I 
find this language: 

“All persons within the jurisdiction of the United States shall have 
the same right, in every State and Territory, to make and enforce con¬ 
tracts, to sue, be parties, give evidence, and to the full and equal benefit 
of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property as 
is enjoyed by white citizens, and shall be subject to like punishments, 
j)ains, penalties,” and so forth. 

One w’ould think that the logical conclusion from that which I have 
last read would be that all citizens are entitled to equal protection every¬ 
where. It appears to mean that. 

Then I turn to another piece of legislation—that which is known as 
“ The Enforcement Act ”—one which some of you, gentlemen, did not 
like very much when it was enacted—and there I find another declara¬ 
tion on the same question. The act is entitled “An act to enforce the 
right of citizens of the United States to vote in the several States of 
this Union and for other purposes.” The right of “ citizens’’’ to vote ap¬ 
pears to be conceded by this act. In the 2d section, the act says : 

“ It shall be the duty of every such person and officer to give to all 
citizens of the United States the same and equal opportunity to perform 
such prerequisite, and to become qualified to vote, without distinction 
of race, color, or previous condition of servitude.” 

I ask you, gentlemen of the committee, as lawyers, whether you do 
not think that, after we have been declared to be citizens, we have the 
right to claim the protection of this enforcement act Is it not clear to 
you that the gentlemen have made the most singular muddle—I don’t 
wish to seem disrespectful—but is it not the fact, that they have made 
the most singular muddle in the present condition of woman in this 
country % We are practically remanded to a sort of intermediate con¬ 
dition, although we have been declared to be citizens by the laws of the 
United States. When you, gentlemen from the North, rise in your 
places here in the halls of Congress and make these walls ring with your 
eloquence, you are prone to talk a great deal about the right of every 
United States citizen to the ballot, and the necessity of protecting every 
such citizen in its exercise. What do you mean by it*? 

It occurs to me here to call your attention to a matter of recent oc¬ 
currence. As you know, there has been a little uiiideasantness in 
Maine—a State which is not without a representative among the mem¬ 
bers of the Judiciary Committee—and certain gentlemen there, es¬ 
pecially Mr. Blaine, have been greatly exercised in their minds because, 
as they allege, the people of Maine have not been permitted to express 
their will at the polls. AVhy, gentlemen, I assert that a majority of the 


-8 


WOMAN SUFFRAOr. 


people of IVIaiiie have never been permitted to ex[)ress their will at the 
l)olls. A majority of the ])eople of Maine are women, and, from the 
foundation of thivS government to tliis day, have never been })ermitted 
to exercise any of the inalienable rights of citizens. Mr. Blaine made a 
speech a <lay or two ago in Augusta. He began by reciting the condi¬ 
tion of affairs, owing to the effort, as he states, “ to substitute a false 
count for an honest ballot,” and congratulated bis audience upon the in¬ 
strumentalities by which they had triumphed—“ without firing a gun, 
without shedding a drop of blood, without striking a single blow, with- 
cut one disorderly assemblage. The people have regained their own 
right through the might and majesty of their own laws.” He goes on iu 
this vein to speak of those whom he calls “ the people of Maine.” Well, 
gentlemen, I do not think you will deny that women are people. It ap¬ 
pears to me that what Mr. Blaine said in that connection was nonsense, 
unless indeed he forgot that there were any others than men among the 

1) eople of the State of Maine. 1 don’t suppose that you, gentlemen, are 
often so forgetful. Mr. Blaine said further, “ The Bepublicans of Maiue 
and throughout the land felt that they were not merely fighting the bat¬ 
tle of a single year, but for all the future of the State; not merely 
lighting the battle of our own State alone, but for all the States that 
are attempting the great problem of State goveTnment throughout the 
world. The corruption or destruction of the ballot is a crime against 
free government, and when successful is a subversion of free govern¬ 
ment.” Does that mean the ballot for men only or the ballot for the 

2 ) €ople, men and women too ? If it is to be received as meaning any¬ 
thing, it ought to mean not for one sex alone, but for both. 

Mr. Lincoln declared, in one of his noblest utterances, that no man was 
good enough to govern another man without that man’s consent. Of 
course he meant it in its broadest terms ; he meant that no man or wo¬ 
man was good enough to govern another man or woman without that 
other man’s or woman’s consent. 

I need not recall to you, gentlemen, the old fundamental princit)les of * 
this republic, that “ taxation without representation is tyranny,” “ that 
governments derive their just powers from the consent of' the governed.” 
You learned those lessons when boys at school ; and remember, gentle¬ 
men, we learned them when little girls at school also. W"e love our lib¬ 
erties just as dearly as you love yours, and we do not like to be disfran¬ 
chized any more than you would like it. What gentleman here would 
consent to give u[) his right to vote—I will not say’ his right to hold 
office—and yet you expect us, women, some of us as old as yourselves, 
and some of us your seniors, to be content with our disfranchised con¬ 
dition. 

Mr. Blaine, on another occasion, in connection with tlie same subject- 
matter, had much to say’ of tlie enormity of the (){)pression practiced by' 
his political ojiponents in depriving the town of Portland of the right of 
representation in view of its paying such heavy taxes as it does pay. 
He expressed the greatest indignation at the attempt, forgetting utterly^ 
that great, that enormous, body of women who pay taxes and who are 
perpetually deprived of the right of reiiresentatiou. 

In tins connection it may be pertinent for me toex[)ress the hope, by 
way^ of a suggestion to you, gentlemen, that hereafter, when making 
your speeches, you will not use the term “citizens” in a broad, general 
sense unless you mean to include women as well as men, and that when 
you do not mean to include women you will speak of male citizens as 
a distinct and separate class, because the term, in its general a[)plica- 
tion, is illogical and its meaning obscure if not self-contradictory. 


WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


9 


^Ir. Hayes, oar amiable president, was so pleased with one of the 
sentences in the message put out by him a year ago that, in his mes- 
Silge of this year, he has reiterated tlie same sentence, repeating it in 
l)recisely identical language. The sentence reads thus: “That no 
temporary or administrative interests of government will ever displace 
the zeal of our people in defense of The jtrimary rights of citizenship, 
and that the power of public ojnnion will override all political prejudices 
and all sectional and State attachments in demanding that all over our 
wide territory the name and character of citizen of the United States 
shall mean one and the saine thing, and carry with them unchallenged 
vsecurity and respect.” Let me suggest what he ought to have said 
unless he intended to include women, although I am afraid that Mr. 
Hayes, when he wrote this, forgot that there were women in tlie United 
States, notwitlistanding that his excellent wife, ])erhaps, stood by his 
side. He ought to have said: “ An act having been passed to etiforce 
the rights male citizens to vote, tbe true vigor of half poi)ulation 
is thus expressed, and no interests of government will ever displace 
the zeal of half of our people in defense of the primary rights oX our 
male citizens. The prosperity of the States depends upon the protection af¬ 
forded to our male citizens ; and the. name and character of male ci; .zens 
of the United States shall mean one and the same thing and carr> with 
them unchallenged security and respect ” If Mr. Hayes had thus ex- 
l)ressed himself, he would have made a perfectly logical and clear state¬ 
ment. Gentlemen, I hope that hereafter, vhen st)eaking or voting in be¬ 
half of the citizens of the United States, you will bear this in mind and 
will lemeinber that women are citizens as well as men, and that they 
claim the same rights. 

Gentlemen, this (juestion of woman suffrage cannot much longer be 
ignored by you. In the State from which I come, although we had not 
last fall a right to vote, we are confident that the influence which we, 
as women, brought to bear in determining the result of the election at 
that time had something to do with sending into retirement a Demo¬ 
cratic governor who was opjiosed to our reform, and electing a Re|)ub- 
lican governor who was in favor of it. Recollect, gentlemen, that the 
expmiditure of time and money whi di has been made in this cause will 
not be without its effect. The time is coming when the demand of an 
immensii number of the women of this country cannot be ignored. AVhen 
• you see these rejiresentatives coming up here from all the States of the 
Union to ask for this right, can you doubt that, some day, tht‘y will 
succ(M*d in their mission ? We do not stand before you to jdead as beg¬ 
gars; we ask for that for which we do ask as our right. e ask it as 
due to the memory of our ancestors, who fought for the freedom of this 
country just as bravely as did yours. We ask it on many consi«lera- 
tions. Why, gentlemen, the very furniture here, the carpet on this floor, 
was paid for with our monej'. We are taxed equally with the men to 
contribute to defray the expenses of this CongreS'!, and we have a right 
equally with them to particiiiate iu the government. 

In closing, I have only to ask. Is there no man here present who ap¬ 
preciates the emergencies of this hour ? Is there no one among you who 
will rise up, on the floor of Congress, as the champion of this unreiiresented 
half of the jieople of the Dnded States I If so, the time is not far dis¬ 
tant when fherti will be. The time is not far distant when we shall have 
our liberties, and the politician who can now understand file political im¬ 
portance of our cause, the statesman who can now see, and will now ap¬ 
preciate, the Justice of it, that man, if true to himself, will write his 
name high on the scroll ot-fame beside those of the men who have been 


10 


WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


the saviors of this country. Gentlemen, T entreat you not to let this 
hearing go by without giving due weight to all that we have said. , I 
ask you to carry it in your hearts. We shall be successful in a few years. 
You can no more stay the onward current of this reform than you can 
tight against the stars in their courses. 

Mr. WiLLiTS, of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a 
suggestion here. The regulation amendment, as it has heretofore been 
submitted, provided that the right of citizens of the United States to 
vote should not be abridged on account of sex. I notice that the amend¬ 
ment which the ladies here now propose has pretixeii to it this phrase: 
“ The right of suffrage in the United States shall be based on citizen¬ 
ship.” I call attention to this, because 1 would like to have them ex- 
])laiu as fully as they may why they incorporate the i)lirase, “shall be 
based on citizenshi[).” Is the meaning this, that all citizens shall have 
the right to vote, or sim]dy that citizeiishij) shall he the basis of suf- 
tragef The words “ or for any reason not at)plicable to all citizens of 
the United States,” also seem to require explanaiiou. The proposition, 
in the form in which it is now submitted, I understand, covers a little 
more than has been covered by the amendment submitted in previous 
years. 

Mrs. Sara A. Spencer, of Washington, D. C. If the committee will 
permit me, 1 will say that the amendment, in its present form, is the 
concentrated wish of the women of the United States. The women of 
the country sent to Congress tietitions, asking for three different forms 
of constitutional amendment and, when preparing the form of amend¬ 
ment now before the committee, I concentrated these three forms in the 
one before you (identical with that ot the resolution offered in the House 
by Hon. George B. Boring and by Hon. T. W. Ferry in the Senate), 
omitting at the request of each of the three classes of petitioners, all 
phrases which were regarded by any of them as objectionable. The 
amendment, as now presented, is therefore the combined wish of the 
women of the country, viz, that citizenship in the United States shall 
mean suffrage, and that no one shall be deprived of the right to vote for 
reasons not equally applicable to all citizens. 

REMARKS OF MRS. MATILDA JOSLYN GAGE, OF NEW YORK. 

Mrs. Gage, the next speaker, was given thirty minutes. 

She said: 

Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Judiciarij Committee : 

It is upon this point of the centralization of the suffrage power in the 
hands of the United States that I propose to S[)eak. I will endeavor to 
show you that, in the progress of our government, from its very incep- 
tion, liberty has been defended and has increased as certain power has 
been centralized in the hands of the general government, and taken 
away from the States. It will be borne in mind that at the beginning 
of their rebellion against Great Britain, each of the colonies had its indi¬ 
vidual grievance, and that at an early day, long anterior to the procla¬ 
mation of our Declaration of Independence, it was deemed best for the 
colonies to unite. 

Our hist American Congress, which met in 17G5, was fearful that the 
divers injuries under which the colonies suffered, and the many different 
charters under which they were governed might ensnare them—such 
was the language made use of by that Congress—“might ensnare 
them” into working in opposite diri^fflons. In this the Congress rep¬ 
resented the i)opular sentiment, which found-expression in various ways. 


WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


11 


In the snnie year in wliicb that body first convened, The Constitutional 
Com ant, a i)ai)er published in the city of New York, came out with 
a significant representation of a serpent surrouiab'd by thirteen stars 
and, encircling' the whole, an inscription reading ‘‘Join, or die!’’ This 
inscription was at once adopted by the colonists as tlieir motto 5 the 
announcement of it flew like wildfire over the whole thirteen colonies; 
the peot)le began to be united in sentiment, and to realize that only by 
banding together in one compact whole could they hope to make their 
separate forces effective against the tyranny of Great Britain. It followed 
that, prior to our Declaration of Independence, eleven of thecolonies, and 
a ])ortion of one of the two remaining, united in certain articles of associ¬ 
ation. Indeed, that is theday to which weought to look back as thatof the 
birth of our nation, instead of that of 1770; for at that day, although form¬ 
ally adhering to their allegiance to Great Britain and to Ilis Majesty 
George III, they united together and thenceforth acted as one body in 
regard to non importation, non-ex])ortation, and non-cmnsumihion, and 
practically became one people. Some nine years after The Constitutional 
Courant had put forth the motto of jom or die, the hist American Con¬ 
gress gave expression to the i)oi>ular sentiment in declaring its appre¬ 
hension that “the diverse interests” of the American colonies would 
“ ensnare them ” to keep themselves separate from each or her. In 177iC 
with the ])roclamation of our Declaration of Independence, our country 
came beforr^ the world as an independent nation and one possessed of 
all the rights of a nation. 

The importance of the necessity of a greater centralization of po¬ 
litical })ower in the hands of the general government became mani¬ 
fest within a brief period after that proclamation had been made, 
as certain States asserted the right of an individual State to make 
peace, declare war, and contract alliances. Articles of confederation, 
having for their object the consolidation of certain powers in the gen¬ 
eral government with a view to promoting the security and ensuring 
the liberty of all the peo])le, were entered into by the States. In 1782, 
after much discussion, originated upon a proposition in Congn^ss to levy 
certain tariff' duties and imposts—the State of Bhode Island, a(l\ octiting 
what is now known as “ the State rights’ view, and protesting against 
the proposition through her Representative, the Speaker of the lower 
house, Hon. William Bradford—it was recoinmended by Congress that 
the States should confer greater power upon the general government. 
This recommendation was acquiesced in by only four of the thirteen col¬ 
onies. The discussion, however, continue<l. It was then declared that 
the rights for which this nation contended were the rights of humanity. 
In the same year in which Rhode Island made her protest, the State of 
New York, from which I come, formally submitted a pro[)ositiou for a 
general convention of the people to |)assupon the question. This failed 
to ensure definite action. Finally, in 1786, the house of delegates of 
Virginia, passed a resolution inviting the assembling of commissioners 
from the various States, to discuss the question and agree upon some 
means for conceding greater power to the general government. In Sep¬ 
tember of the same year, as the result of a conference of commissioners 
from the States of New York, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and 
Maryland (three of which were then slave States), a call was issued for 
a Constitutional convention. This convention assembled in Philadelphia 
and finally adopted a framework of government, which received the 
approval of the people. Subsequent to the adoption of the Constitution, 
some ten conciliatory amendments were appended to it. 

I have thus hastily reviewed the more prominent features of our early 


12 


WOMAN leUPFPAGE. 


goveriiinental history with reference to the steps taken from time to 
time to secure the liberty of the citizens by centralizing power in the 
hands of the general government. 

In making this demand for the ballot as secured by the United States, 
we women have frequently been met with this objection, ‘’It is central¬ 
ization, and centralization tends to destroy liberty.” I acknowledge, 
gentlemen, that an indiscriminate centralization of power does tend to 
destroy liberty; but, on the other hand, a wise and Judicious centrali¬ 
zation of certain powers of government is not only promotive of, but 
absolutely essential to, the maintenance and perj)etuation of liberty. 
The accumulation of the powers of a State in the hands of the legislature 
of a State, by which that body is given the exclusive control of all State 
affairs even down to the building of a bridge or the location of a village 
cemetery, is one ])hase of that centralization which is dangerous to lib¬ 
erty. To such an extent has this polic.y been carried that in many of 
the States, steps have been taken to curtail or restrict the State gov¬ 
ernment and to give the county and town authorities the control of their 
own local affairs. With respect to all such matters, we women believe 
in a diff'usion of the powers of government. We appreciate the fact 
that, as power becomes more diffused in that way, in connection with 
these minor matters, liberty is more fully established. 

In regard to general governmental matters, such as the exercise of the 
suffrage by citizens of the United States, we know that in the steals it 
lias taken in that direction the general government, as I have shown 
you, has promoted the liberty of the citizen and better secured it by 
the exercise of its protecting power over the ballot. 

Following the adoption of theConstitution and the ten amendments of 
which I have spoken, other steps were taken to centralize power in the 
general government because of the necessity which seemed to be felt 
at the time for the enforcement of this jiolicy. In the latter part of 
the eighteenth century, the Xlth amendment to the Constitution (per¬ 
taining to the Judiciary) was adopted, and in the early part of the 
nineteenth century, the Xllth amendment (regulating the election of 
PrcA'ident and Vice-President by electors), in regard to which I believe * 
a bill for a change in the method is now [lending beloie the House, 
was ado])ted. An interval of some years elapsed before this necessity 
for a more complete centralization of power in the general manage¬ 
ment again manifested itself. It did present itself to the attention of 
the peoiile of the country upon the breaking out of the war of the Re¬ 
bellion, when the Xlllth amendment was adopted, and afterwards the 
XIVth and XVth amendments, all of them seeming to be in the interest 
of liberty. 

Here [lerniit me to digress for a moment in order to notice an objec¬ 
tion that we have sometimes encountered, aud one that was urged when 
Mrs. Minor’s case came before the SuiiremeCourtof the United States. It 
found expression in the declaration of Chief Justice Waite when he de¬ 
clared that the United States had no voters. I assert that those who 
exercise the suffrage are in a certain sense voters of the United States as 
distinguished fronrthe voters of the States. I claim, and shall endeavor 
to show you in the course of my remarks, that the [lower over the ballot 
which has been relinquished by the several States has been voluntarily 
relinquished to the general government, in the course of time, as the 
States have become consolidated intoone harmonious whole. The XIVth 
amendment declared that all [lersons born and naturalized in the United 
States or in the several States are citizens of the State in which they 
reside. Then the XVth amendment was passed securing to all men 


WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


13 


the ri,£cht to vote without regard to color. Tlie purpose and effect of 
those amendinents was to centralize this power, so far as regards the 
colored men, in the hands of the United iStates. In other words, the 
general government made those colored men United States voters, as 
those amendments completely overrode all State provisions. The States 
which had denied to colored men the right to vote could not longer with¬ 
hold the suffrage Irom them after those amendments went into effect. 
In the State of Isew York, from which I come, for instance, prior to the 
ratification of those amendments, no colored man was allowed to vote 
unless he had a proi)erty qualification of $250, but immediately alter the 
ratification of those amendments the State statute on that subject be¬ 
came a dead letter; and, although it remained for a time on the statute 
books of the State, these colored men were admitted to vote irrespective 
of the property qualification. 1 ask therefore, gentlemen, were they not 
United States voters f 

We now ask, at the hands of Congress, the passage of the XYlth 
amendment. VVe ask this in the interest of liberty, not only because 
we seek for our own, but because we would have you preserve your lib¬ 
erty. We base our demand upon the broadest considerations. Accord¬ 
ing to the argument of our opponents, we have this great anomaly iu 
governmental history, that the underlying principle of a goverment 
which was founded, as was our own, uj^on the basis of individual rights, 
ui)on the right of every person to self government (which rights in this 
country are only exercised by and through the ballot), that this funda¬ 
mental i)rinciple has been left for 100 years in the hands of the States 
individually, and should continue there. I answer that you have taken 
from the States the power to fix State boundaries, to coin money, to estab¬ 
lish post-routes, to declare peace or war, to collect revenues, to regulate 
commerce, and such like powers; and, in the greater interest of the liber¬ 
ties of the i)eo[)le, you have centralized these powers in the United States 
Government. Under the amendments to the Constitution, it is only the 
black man who is secure in his right to vote in the States. AVhite men 
are not more secure in that right than are we women; and I submit 
that this theory of government which admits that the States severally 
have entire jurisdiction over the ballot is a most dangerous one. This 
power is shown most dangerously in those States which have prohibited 
women from holding the ballot and declared that males only should ex¬ 
ercise it. It is against this that we women protest when we declare that 
the ballot should be based only on citizenship. We desire that citizen¬ 
ship and suffrage in the United States should be practically synonymous 
terms. Under such an interpretation of the meaning of the terms, we 
would be willing to leave the regulation of the suffrage in the hands of the 
States. I, for one, would not take from the States any power which be¬ 
longs to them ; I only ast that what shall be done shall be done exactly 
in the line of all that has been done since the beginning of our govern¬ 
ment for the i)urpose of more fully securing the liberty of all citizens of 
the United States, of enabling the people of the States more fully to pre¬ 
serve their political dignity, while permitting them to regulate the suf¬ 
frage on conditions equally applicable to all persons. This is what is 
meant by the language of the form of amendment here submitted; |and 
in asking this, I repeat, we are asking for the security of your liberty as 
well as our own. 

Furthermore, under the amendments to the Constitution, the condition 
of male citizens is this: Any white man may be disfranchised by a State 
law but no colored man can be thus disfranchised; the colored man is 
secure while the white man is ifot secure in the exercise of the suffrage; 


14 


W0M4N SUFFRAGE. 


and the security of the colored man depends not ni)()n any statutes of 
the States but solely upon the assurance atfbrded by the United States 
in the amendments to which I have referred.^ 

Those of you, gentlemen, who are advocates of the State rights doc¬ 
trine need entertain no apprehension that we contemplate any violation 
of that doctrine in the])osition we have assumed here, because an amend¬ 
ment to the Constitution such as we propose cannot be ratified, and 
therefore cannot be made affective, without the consent of two-thirds of 
the States. When Miss Anthony, in her argument before the Senate 
Judiciary Committee yesterday, asked the chairman (Senator Thurman) 
whether that was not in striet accordance with the States rights prin¬ 
ciple, that gentleman answered that it was. 

As I was saying, the States, at all times in the past, when they have 
given up a portion of their liberties in the interest of the general gov¬ 
ernment, have given them up in the interest of all the States, and, iu so 
doing, have secured their own liberty more fully. We know, too, that 
in proportion as the right of the ballot is nationalized, as it is made 
broader, as it is made more secure to citizens of the United States, the 
more it is permanently secured. W^e know, too, <^hat our country has 
reached a period in its history when the attention of the people of the 
country is directed most earnestly and anxiously to wdiat shall be 
the condition of the republic. AVe are convinced that this suffrage 
question has assumed a larger and wider scope and is of more profound 
interest at this time than at any time heretofore; that it is rapidly 
becoming a feature of the national policy; and that, since the war, the 
demand for woman suffrage has extended over the whole country. W^e 
desire to remind you, gentlemen, that by passing the XVIth amendment 
you w'ill not only be securing to yourselves the rights of individual self 
government and making yourselves more secure in the exercise of those 
rights, but that you will be following directly in the line which our 
country has followed from the meeting of the first American Congress 
up to this day. AUith these remarks, I leave this portion of the ques¬ 
tion with you. 

[Here the time expired.] 

REMARKS OF MISS PHCEBE W. COUZINS, OF MISSOURI. 

Miss CouziNS (to whom had been assigned the next thirty minutes) 
came forward and said : 

Mr. Chairman and Gentlemen of the Judiciary Coynmittee: I am in¬ 
vited to speak of the dangers which beset us at this hour in the recent 
decision by the United States Supreme Court in the case of Mrs. Minor. 
Coming, as I do, from the State of Missouri, it has been deemed best 
that I should review this case more fully before you than has been done 
by the speakers who have preceded me. 

The decision of the Supreme Court of the United States in Mrs. Mi¬ 
nor’s case not only stultifies its previous interpretation of the recent 
Constitutional amendments and makes them a dead letter, but will rank, 
in the coming ages, in the history of the judiciary, with the Dred Scott 
decision. The law, as explained in the Dred Scott case, was an infamous 
one, which trampled upon the most solemn rights of the loyal citizens of 
the government, and declared the Constitution to mean anything or 
nothing, as the case might be. Yet, the decision iu that case had a 
saving clause, for it was not the unanimous voice of a Democratic judi¬ 
ciary. Dissenting opinions were nobly uttered from the bench. In the 
more recent case, under the rule of a ilepublican judiciary (created by a 


WO:\’AN SUFFRAGE. 


15 


party professino- to l)e one of justice and equal rij»’hts,) the rights of one- 
half of tlie ])eople were deliberately abro^i^ated witliout a dissenting voice. 
Tliis violation of the fundamental principles of our government (;alled 
forth no ])rotest from the bench of a Kepublican judiiaary. In all of the 
de(nsions against woman in the Kei)ublic,an coint, there has not been 
found one Lord Manslield who, rising to the sui)reme height of an unbi¬ 
ased Judgment, would give the imim)rtal decide tliatshall crown with regal 
dignity the mother of the race: ‘‘I care not for the supi)Osed dictates of 
judges, however emimmt, if they be contrary, to })riiiciple. If the par¬ 
ties will have judgment, let justice be done, though the Heavens fall.” 

The Dred Scott decision declared as the law of citizenship, “to be a 
citizen is to liave actual i)oss(*ssi'.)n and enjoyment or the perfect right 
to the acquisition and an enjoyment of an entire equality of privileges, 
civil and jiolitical.” But the vslave power was tlnm dominant and the 
court decided that a black man was not a citizen because he had not the 
right to vote. But when the Constitution was so amended as to makt* 
“all persons born or naturalized in the United States citizens there¬ 
of,” a negro, by virtue of his United States citizenship, was declared, 
under the amendments, a voter in every State in the Union. And the 
Supreme Court reaffirmed this right in the celebrated Slaugliter-house 
cases (16 Wallace, 71), lealhrming the negro’s right. It said, “The 
negro, having by the XlVth amendment, been declared to be a citizen of 
the United States, is thus made a voter in every State in the Union.” . 

But when the loyal women of Missouri, aiipiehending that “every¬ 
body beneath the flag were made citizensand voters by theXIVth amend¬ 
ment,” through Mrs. Minor, applied to the Supreme Court for protection 
in the exercise of that same right, this high tribunal, reversing all its 
former decisions, proclaims State sovereignty superior to national au¬ 
thority. This it does in this strange language: “Being born in the 
United States, a woman is a person and therefore a citizen”—we are 
much obliged to them for that definition of our identity as persons— 
“ but the Constitution of the United States does not confer the right of 
suffrage upon any one.” And then, in the face of its previous decisions, 
the court declared: “The United States has no voters in the States of 
its own creation ; ” that the elective officers of the United States are all 
elected, directly or indirectly, by State voters. It remands woman to 
the States for her protection, thus giving to the State the supreme au¬ 
thority and overthrowing the entire results of the war, which was fought 
to maintain the national supremacy over any and all subjects in which 
the rights and privileges of the citizens of the United States are in¬ 
volved. 

No supreme allegiance, gentlemen of the committee, can be claimed 
for or by a government if it has no citizens of its own creation, and con¬ 
stitutional amendments cannot confer authority over matters which have 
no existence in the Constitution. Thus, our supreme lawgivers, hold them¬ 
selves up for obloquy and ridiculein their interpretation of themostsolemn 
rights of loyal citizens, and make our constitutional law to mean anything 
or nothing as the case may be. You will see, gentlemen, that the very 
[loint which the South contended for as the true one is here acknowledged 
to be the true one by the Supreme Court—that of State rights superior to 
national authority. The whole of the recent contest hinged upon this. 
The appeal to arms and the cohstitutional amendments by the govern¬ 
ment were to establish the subordination of the State to national su¬ 
premacy, to maintain the national authority over any and all subjects 
in which the rights and privileges of the citizens of the United States 
were involved j but this decision in Mrs. Minor’s case completely nulli- 


16 


WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


fies tlie sn])retne authority of the government, and gives the South more 
than has liitherto been claimed tor it by the advocates of State rights. 
The subject of the franchise is thus wholly withdrawn from federal su¬ 
pervision and (control. If‘‘ the United States has no citizens of its own 
creation,” of course no suiueme allegiance can be claimed by it over 
the various citizens of the States. 

The constitutional amendments also cannot confer authority over a 
matter which has no existence in the Constitution. If it has no voters, 
it can have nothing whatever to do with the elections and voting in the 
States; yet the United States invaded the State of New York, sent its 
officers tliere to try, convict, and sentence Miss Anthony for exer¬ 
cising a right in her own State which they declared that the Uni¬ 
ted States had no juriSiliction over. They send United States troops 
into the South to protect the negro in his right to vote, and then 
declare they have no jurisdiction over his voting. Then, mai k the 
grave results which may and can follow this decision and legislation. 
I do not imagine that the Supreme Court, in its cowardly dodging of 
woman’s right to all the rights and privileges which cirizenshi[) involves, 
designed to comidetely abrogate the princiides established by the recent 
contest, or to nullify the ensuing legislation on the subject. But it cer¬ 
tainly has done all this; for it must logically follow that if the United 
States has no citizens, it cannot legislate upon the rights of citizens, 
and the recent amendments are devoid of authority. It has well been 
suggested by Mr. Minor, in bis criticism of the decision, that if members 
of the House of Kepresentatives are elected by State voters, as the 
Supreme Court has thus declared, there is no leason why States may 
not refuse to elect them as in 18G0, and thus deprive Congress of its 
power. And it a sufficient number could be united to recall at their 
pleasure these Kepresentatives, what authorit}" has the Federal Govern¬ 
ment, under this decision, for coercing them into subjection or refusing 
them a separation, if all these voters in the States desired an independ¬ 
ent existence ? None whatever. 

Mr. Garfield, in the House, in his speech last March, calls attention 
to this grave subject, but does not allude to the fact that the Supreme 
Court has already opened the door. He says: ‘There are several ways 
in which our government may be annihilated without the firing of a gun. 
For example, suppose the people of the United States should say, we 
will elect no Kepresentatives to Congress. Of course this is a violent 
supposition; but suppose that they do not. Is there any remedy ! Does 
our Constitution i)rovide any remedy whatever “? In two years there 
would be no House of Kepresentatives; of course, no support of the 
government and no government. Suppose, again, the States should 
say, through their legislatures, we will cdect no Senators. Such absten¬ 
tion alone would absolutely destroy this government; and our system 
provides no process of compulsion to prevent it. Again, suppose the 
two houses were assembled in their usual order, and a majority of one 
in this body or in the Senate should firmly band themselves together 
and say, we will vote to adjourn the moment the hour of meeting ar¬ 
rives, and continue so to vote at every session during our two years of 
existence—the government would i)erish, and there is no i)rovision of 
the Constitution to prevent it.” The States may inform their Kepre¬ 
sentatives that they can do this; and, under this position, they have 
the power and the right so to do. 

Gentlemen, we are now on the verge of one of the most important 
Presidential campaigns. The party in power holds its reins by a very 
uncertain tenure. If the decision shall favor the one which has been 


WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


17 


OD tbe anxious bench tor lo! these twenty years, and in probation until 
hope has well-nigh departed, what may be its action if invested again 
with the control of the destinies of this nation? Under the decision of 
which I have spoken, the Republican judiciary and legislation have 
placed in the hands of that party a club which can break in pieces their 
political bonds and scatter the illogical brains of their adversaries to the 
four winds. Hurling back at the party which has so long dominated 
over it the principle which the Republican party has everywhere bombas¬ 
tically enunciated, it may cause that partj" to realize that there is a vast 
difference as to whose ox it is that is gored in the coming political pasture. 
The next party in power may inquire,and answer, by whatrightand how 
far the Southern States are bound by the legislation in which they had no 
partor consent. And if theSupremeCourt of a Republicaujudiciary now 
declares, after the war, after the constitutional amendments, that federal 
suffrage does not exist and never had an existence in the Coustitutiou, 
it follows that the South has the right to regulate and control all of the 
questions arising upon suffrage in the several States without any inter¬ 
ference on the part of an authority which declares it has no jurisdiction. 

Gentlemen, an able writer has said. ‘‘All injustice at last works out a 
loss. The great ledger of nations does not report a good balance for 
injustice. It has always met fearful losses. The irrepealable law of 
justice will, sooner or later, grind a nation to powder, if it fails to estab¬ 
lish that equilibrium of allegiance and protection which is the essential 
end of all government. Woe to that nation which thinks lightly of the 
duties it owes to its citizens and imagines that governments are not 
bound by moral laws.’^ 

It was the tax on tea—woman’s drink prerogative—which precipitated 
the rebellion of 1776. To allay the irritation of the colonies, all taxes 
were rescinded save that on tea, which was left to indicate King George’s 
dominion. But our revolutionary fathers and mothers said, “ No; the 
tax is paltry, but the principle is great;” and Eve, as usual, pointed 
the moral for Adam’s benefit. A most suggestive i)icture, one which 
aroused the intensest patriotism of the colonies (and it is one which may, 
perhaps, accompany the typical snake-form ot which Mrs. Gage has 
spoken to you), was that of a woman pinioned by her arms to the ground 
by a British peer, with a British red-coat holding her throat with one 
hand, and with the other forcibly thrusting down her throat the contents 
of a tea pot, which she heroically spewed back In his face; while the 
figure of Justice, in the distance, with veiled face, wept over this i)rostrate 
Liberty. Now, gentlemen, we might well adopt a similar representation 
as indicative of our own prostrate liberty. Here is Mrs. iSmith [refer¬ 
ring to Mrs. Julia Smith, of Glastonbury, Conu.J, whose cow has been 
sold every year by the government, contending for the same principle 
that our forefathers fought for, that of resistance to taxation without 
representation. We might have a picture of a cow, with an American 
tax-collector at the horns, a foreign-born assessor at the heels, forcibly 
selling the birthright of an American citizen, while Julia and Abby 
Smith, in the background, with veiled faces, weep over the degeneracy 
of Republican leadership. 

The same tyrannical spirit of King George is manifest to day. The 
rights of every citizen, save of women, are now jealously guarded and 
freely recognized. Royalty, on Capitol Hill, in complaisant security, 
with its scepter in the White House and its throne in Justice’s Had, 
shouts, “The king is dead,” and yet we must say, “Long live the king.’^ 
But, forever and aye, uneasy is the head that wears a crown ; and dis¬ 
guised Indians—(one lady has said that we were not Indians; but we may 

H. Mis. 20-2 


18 


WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


be Ti'dians, gentlemen, and may yet take some scalp.s on Oapitol Hill)— 
disguised Indians may yet proclaim wrecked s!iii)s for that royalty 
which dares to sail upon the main with autocratic powers. 

But there are those in authority in the government who do not believe 
in this decision that has been made by the Supreme Court of the United 
States. The Attorney-General, in his instructions to the United States 
marshals aud their deputies or assistants In the Southern States, wheu 
speaking of the countenance and support of all good citizens of the 
United States in the respective districts of the marshals, remarks: ‘^It 
is not necessary to say that it is upon such countenance and support 
that the United States mainly rely in their endeavor to enforce the 
right to vote which they have given or have secured.’’ Yon notice the 
phraseology. Again, he says: ^‘The laws of the United States are 
su})reme, and so, consequently, is the action of otliciais of the United 
States in enforcing them.” Secretary Sherman said, in his speech at 
Steubenville on the 6th of July : ‘‘The negroes are free, and are citizens 
and voters. That, at least, is a part of the Constitution and cannot be 
changed.” Mr. Hayes has been quoted here. In his last message he 
has quoted the same expression which he made use of in a former mes¬ 
sage. He says: “I find no reason to qualify the 0 [)iuion I expressed in 
my last annual message, that no temporary or administrative interests 
of government w ill ever displace the zeal of our people in defense of the 
p»rimary rights of citizenship, and that the power of public oi)iuion will 
override all political jnejudices and all sectional and State attachments 
in demanding that all over our wide territory the name and character 
of citizen of the United States shall mean one and the same thing, and 
carry w ith them unchallenged security aud respect.” 

And thisis what we ask of you this morning, “that citizenship shall 
mean one and the same thing” for us, women. 

In conclusion, gentlemen, I say to you that a sense of justice is the 
sovereign power of the human mind, the most unyielding of any; it re¬ 
wards with a higher sanction,it punishes with a deeper agony than any^ 
earthly tribunal. It never slumbers, never dies. It constantly utters 
and demands justice by the eternal rule of right, truth, and equity. 
Aud on these eternal foundation stones w'e stand. 

Crowning the dome of this great building (which was erected, as Mrs. 
Gage has so beautifully and so truthfully said, by the taxes of the women 
of the United States), there stands the majestic figure of a woman repre¬ 
senting Liberty. It wms no idealistic thought or accident of vision which 
gave us Liberty prefigured by a woman. It is the great soul of the uni¬ 
verse pointing the final revelation yet to come to humanity, the prophecy 
of the ages—the last to be first. Not more certain than that upon the 
dome of the Capitol stands the majestic figure of a woman, representing 
all that is grand and noble and free in self-government, is it that in the 
great hereafter there shall come the exaltation of a glorious woman¬ 
hood, coming up out of the wilderness of the past, clear as the sun, fair 
as the moon, powerful in her righteousness as an army with banners; 
and that humanity, from the East and the West, and the North and the 
South, sitting at her feet, shall learn that Freedom from its loftiest heights 
is Liberty in Woman. 

[Here the time expired.] 

REMARKS OF MISS SUSAN B. ANTHONY OF NEW YORK. 

At this point the time allotted for the hearing having expired, the 
chairman announced an extension of thirty minutes to allow Miss 

Anthony to address the committee. 

She said: 

Mr. Chairman and Oentlemen of the Committee: I did not propose to 




WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


19 


make any argument, but simply to call* the attention of tlie committee 
to tlie fact that disfranchisement is not only political degradation, but 
that it is also social, morale and industrial degradation. It does not 
matter whether the class affected by disfranchisement is that of ignorant, 
intemperate, or vicious men—the serfs in Russia, the negroes on our 
l)lantations before the war, the Chinamen on our Pacific coast to-day— 
or the intelligent, educated women of this Re))ublic, disfranchisement 
works precisely the same results. If we could make the men aud women 
of thisrepublic realize fora momentthat theresults-of disfranchisement to 
woman are the same as the results of disfranchisement to all the different 
classes of men I have named, we should not have to wait for another Con¬ 
gress before the proposition for a XVITH amendment would be submitted. 
But the difficulty is that each man to whom we appeal fails to appreciate 
the consequences of this law of disfranchisement or to realize the degrada¬ 
tion which it entails. I have endeavored, in my arguments, to show that 
disfranchisement is the cause of woman’s degradation in the world of 
labor ; that it is because of it that she is doomed, everywhere doomed, 
to remain in the subordinate departments of labor, in the school-house, 
everywhere; that she is doomed to do her work for half pay, always as 
a subordinate, as I have said, and without any promotion. If men 
could only believe that the fact of that position of woman in the world 
of work was due to her disfranchisement, vve should not have one session 
of Congress pass without a proposition for an amendment. But the 
l)eo{)le do not believe it; and yet, as some of the ladies have shown 
here, it is the cause of woman’s degradation in labor everywhere. We 
are here to ask that woman may have the power of the ballot; that 
when she speaks she shall be respected; that when women workers 
in the factories and siiops, the teachers in the school-houses, shall com¬ 
bine together to demand better wages of the capitalists; the political ed¬ 
itors of the iiew’spapers in a community wdll feel that if they speak on 
the side of the capitalist and against the working women their party 
will lose the votes of those workingwomen at the next election. 
With the ballot in the hands of all themillionsof factory women and work¬ 
ingwomen in this nation, you can perceive at once that they have a power 
by which they, like the workmen of the nation, can decide what work they 
will do, what prices they will be paid, and what positions they will occupy. 
Then, as to the government departments of which some one here has 
spoken, the facts are that all over the country there are hundreds 
of thousands of civil service offices; that many of the women of 
this republ’c are well qualified to do the work in those departments, 
but stand very little chance to get a fair quota of those appoint¬ 
ments at the hands of members of Congress, members of the 
state legislatures, and “the powers that be” everywhere—this, 
not because men are unjust, not because many of the members of 
Congress here at Washington would not be glad to have women ap- 
])oiuled to the various positions of work, but because it is an utter im- 
imssibility, politically speaking, for them to secure places. Covern- 
inents cannot afford to give good places, good work, or good offices to 
persons who cannot help to make government. So long as woman holds 
in her hands no power to help make this government, no member of 
Congress caii afford to advocate equal pay and equal i)lace for women 
in the departments. The best of our friends, as members of this com¬ 
mittee, know that, on the floor of Congress, when we have asked them 
to ordain that worjien workers shall be j)aid equal wages with men, they 
have told us that to pass such a law, and entOKte it, would be to drive 
all the women out of the departmerds, because the only excnsi* that 


WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


2 (^ 

the government uov/bas for employing them is that it is a matter of 
ec(»ijomv to tbe government. Xow, vvbat we ask is that women sball 
have this power of appeal to tbe self-interest of tbe goveuiment office¬ 
holders and tbe government itself. We ask that woman sball have the 
ballot that she may come within tbe body-politic, and there become Joint 
heir with her brothers for all tbe good things that are to be disposed of 
at tbe bands of tbe government. 

This disfranchisement is not only an industrial and a social, but a 
moral degradation. Why, gentlemen of tbe committee, did you every 
stop to think of what disfranchisement says to each and every one of 
these women here to-day and to each and every one of the women under 
this proud flag 1 It says, 7 ion compos^ your judgment is not sound, your 
opinions are not worthy to be counted up in what men call “ public sen¬ 
timent,” “ the crystallizing of the popular will into law.” While that is 
true of all women, let me put before you the other side. Enfranchise¬ 
ment says to every man, poor or rich, ignorant or learned, drunk or 
sober—to every man outside the State’s prison or the lunatic asylum— 

your judgment is sound, your opinion is worthy to be counted.” And 
you gentlemen, all of you, recognize the fact that the equal counting and 
equal recognition of men’s ojiinious establishes in this country that good 
thing whicii we call “ political equality”—each and every man equal to 
each and every other man. The ojjinion of tiie most ignorant ditch- 
digger in the country, on election day, counts for just as much as that of 
the richest and proudest millionaire. It is a good thing, gentlemen 5 
and we, women suffragists, believe in the princii)le of democracy 
and republicanistn, in the equal lecognition of all men ; but while 
that principle establishes the equal and just recognition of all men 
among men, we at the same time recognize that it establishes 
between the sexes that hateful thing of inequality; tliat it makes 
all men sovereigns and all women subjects j that it makes all men, 
politically, superiors and all women inferiors. And there is no amount 
of training, education, or discipline that can ever educate an ignorant 
man or a small boy to the belief that that is not the discrimination. 
This ignoring of women’s opinions politically is not grounded upon in¬ 
tellectual inferiority. The more ignorant the man the better he feels 
convinced that he knows more than the most intelligent woman in the 
country. I ntelligent men know that the great work of this republic from 
tlie beginning has been the sloughing off, little by little, of the old feu- 
dalistic ideas of caste, until at last we have this grand idea of self-gov¬ 
ernment. We women know that those who are engaged in this move¬ 
ment are struggling with might aud main to lift the women, through the 
XVilh amemiment, upon the same platform with intelligent, cultivated 
man, va ho does respect an intelligent, cultivated woman, whom the ig¬ 
norant man does not conqiiehend and has no appreciation of. 

I will give you an illustration of my meaning. There are three ladies 
in this room to-day from the State of Iowa. One of those ladies pays 
more taxes in the city of Maquoketa, in which she resides, than do the 
whol(‘ twelve men who are the membersof the common council of her city. 
Those three women, in the city of Maquoketa, and county of Jarksou, 
have been at the very head and front ot the Women’s (Christian Tem¬ 
perance organization in that city. They have prayed, petitioned, aud 
done everything to shut up the gTo.g-shops in tlieir community which a 
disfranchised class can do—which is exactly nothing. On election morn¬ 
ing, the question of license or no license is to be voted on in that city. 
My friend, Mrs. Allen, and other ladies who work with her hav^e paid into 
the treasury of the county of Jackson no small amount of taxes for the 
support of the victims of the idiocy and crime which are the outgrowth of 


WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


21 


the liquor traffic. My friend, Mrs. Allen, is standing on the street on election 
morning, and in another quarter there stands an ignorant man, a man 
who by his drunkenness has caused to be sold under the hammer the 
farm he inherited from his father, whose every dollar of property is gone, 
whose wife and children are houseless and homeless and he a pauper 
in the county house, supported at the public expense. He knows that 
three-fourths of the money taken from Mrs. Allen’s and those other 
ladies’ taxes goes to support him and others like him in his and their 
necessities. He looks at that woman j he sneers .at her education, her 
standing, her fine clothes, her self-respect, at everything she possesses; he 
envies her; but at last he bethinks himself. He folds his arms and with 
utter complacency exclaims, “ Yez can sing, yez can shout, yez can pray, 
yez can petition agin rum; but, he jahers, yez can’t go to the ballot- 
box and vote agin it. I can vote for free whisky and you can’t help 
yourselves.” Now, gentlemen of the committee, do you not see how 
that little fact, that that ignorant pauper’s opinion is thus respected and 
counted that day, while that intelligent tax-paying w^oman’s opinion is 
ignored, educates that ignoramus into a feeling of superiority over tliat 
woman ? Nothing but an amendment of the Constitution of the United 
States, saying that that woman’s opinion shall be respected and counted, 
will ever educate that man to respect her. The secret, underlying cause 
of the disrespect which men often show toward women—the slighting 
manner in w hich coarse, rude men are w ont to speak of woman—lies in 
the fact of woman’s oi)inion being ignored in the deciding of all the great 
questions involving the conditions or surroundings of society and the 
government. 

Then look at the boys of this generation. Before the boyvs head 
reaches the level of the table, he learns that he is one of the siq)erior 
class and that when he is twenty-one years old he will make law's for 
Mrs. ISaxon, Mrs. Gage, and all these ladies who are mothers. His 
mother teaches him ail the requisites for success in after life. She 
says: “My son, you must not chew, nor smoke, nor gamble, nor sw^ear. 
nor be a libeitine; you must be a good man.” The boy looks hismother 
in the face, unbelievingly, and, perchance, at his father, who is guilty 
of every one of the vices which the mother says he must avoid if he 
would become a great man. Perhaps he sees the mirnster of his mother’s 
church walking the street with a cigar in his mouth. Then he looks to 
Congress. It may have been a slander—nevertheless it was a newspa¬ 
per report, and I use it as an illustration—that the Forty fifth Congress, 
at its close, had but one sober man on its floor, and he was a black man 
(Cain) of 8outh Carolina. J do not s.ay that that was true. l>ut I give 
it as I heard it. If the boy goes into court, he sees the judge, with a 
good .sized spittoon by his side and half filled. Now', what does the boy 
say whe?i he looks up to his mother? He says, “ O, nonsense! mother, 
you don’t know what you are talking about ; you’re only a woman.” 

If you w'ould have that boy res[)ect his mother, your laws will first 
have to respect her. Laws do more to educate and develop ])ublic 
sentiment than you, w'ho^ie business it is to make laws and constitutions, 
are doing today. Therefore, as a matter of educating ignorant men 
and small boys in a just and respectful at)i)reciation of woman, I ask 
you not to bury this petition of ours, but to do something to awaken an 
agitation and discussion of our request on the floors of Congress. 

Allow me to make one further observ.otion. Since the days of Fre¬ 
mont and Jessie, women have been very politely invited to attend lie- 
publican meetings. All of you Republicans know how' the women 
filled up your empty benches in those days and made your conventions 


22 


WOMAN SUFFRAGE. 


look very respectable iudeed. By and by the Democrats came into line, 
and the conventions of both parties often contained as many women 
as men. Then the poor stump orators are put to tlieir wit’s end upon 
the woman question. They can, without difficulty, frame paragraphs to 
suit every class of human beings who have a ballot; they can appeal 
alike to the rumsellers and the temperance men, to the Irishmen, the 
Germans, the Swedes, the Bohemians and, since the XVth amend¬ 
ment, to the negroes- Every politician can promptly show why his own 
])arty is the one for which the particular c-lass to which he addresses 
himself should vote. Finally he comes to the iiievitable woman and, 
realizing that he must say something on that point, says: “ lam glad 
to see the ladies here to-night, am always glad to have them in my au¬ 
diences; they are a sort of inspiration, enable me to make a better 
speech: the fact is, gentlemen, I rather like the ladies, for my mother 
was a woman—God bless her.” Now, gentlemen, don’t you believe that 
if under those bonnets there were voters, those voters would soon cause 
that orator and his party, whether in or out of power, to suddenly dis¬ 
cover there were some brains under there? You see that we want this 
power to appeal to the instinct of self-interest in this government; and 
if this committee does not do itself the honor to report a proposition for 
a XVlth amendment, some succeeding committee will do itself that 
honor. The tide is moving, it cannot be swei)t back. T beg you, in the 
name of justice, humanity, and mercy, that you will not keep woman 
coming back here for the next thirty years as she has been kept coming 
here for the last thirty years. 

1 hope too, that you will help us all you can. We, who are agitating 
this movement, are not a moneyed class. 1 trust that you will submit 
a resolution directing that the reports of this hearing shall be printed 
at the government expense. I would also urge the importance of your 
presenting the proposition for a XVlth Amendment before Congress be¬ 
cause it will create an agitation and discussion which may educate not 
only the members of Congress but their constituencies on this question. 

Mr. Lapham, of New York. 1 have understood that your association 
desired to have an act of incorporation. 

Miss Anthony. It is true that we desire incorporation. When the 
rich Miss Dorseys and others all over the country take it into their 
heads to make us a bequest, we should be in a condition to hold any 
such bequest according to law. We have framed a bill looking to the 
chartering of our organization that we may become a legal personage, 
and I ask of you to give the measure whatever of aid you may be able 
to give it. 

Mrs. Sara A. Spencer of Washington, D. C. I desire to thank the 
committee for their courtesy to the women of the United States as rep¬ 
resented here by delegates from twenty-two States. It was in answer to 
my urgent appeal in behalf of our association that the committee granted 
this hearing. All the delegates desired to be heard ; but for the conven¬ 
ience of the committee, the brief time was apportioned among those who 
represented different sections of the country ana different phases of our 
question. I would now ask you, gentlemen, to print the record we have 
made, that it may come before the 370 members of Congress. Wecan ex¬ 
pect this only by your courtesy but, as you have printed 10,000copies of a 
memorial service held over a dead man, we ask you to print a like num¬ 
ber of copies of an argument in behalf of ten millions of living women 
citizens. 

At this point, the hearing having been concluded, the committee ad¬ 
journed. 

C 


V 


\ 







TliRARY OF CONGRESS 


0 019 308 999 


tt- '• 


; 



V 



/•' 

/ 










